Examination of Self-Efficacy Levels of Physical Education Teachers and Trainer Candidates in Terms of Different Variables

Year 2024, Volume: 26 Issue: 2, 282 - 288, 31.08.2024

Ertuğrul Gençay

https://doi.org/10.15314/tsed.1340892

Abstract

Self-efficacy belief is the belief of individuals in performing a particular job by relying on the knowledge, experience and skills needed for the job. In this study, it was aimed to examine the general self-efficacy of physical education and sports teacher candidates and coach candidates in terms of different variables. The sample of the study consists of 245 teacher and coach candidates, 124 female and 121 male, with an average age of 21.87±2.36 years, studying at Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam University Faculty of Sport Sciences in the 2022-2023 academic year. The general self-efficacy scale developed by Magaletta and Oliver (13) and validated in Turkish by Yıldırım and İlhan (24) was used as a data collection tool.
Obtained data were analyzed with Independent sample-t test and One-way Anova test.
In terms of gender, candidates do not differ in their self-efficacy (p>0.05).
It is understood that those who see their professional future as negative get a lower score than those who see their professional future as positive in the persistence-insistence sub-dimension, although their total self-efficacy and starting sub-dimension are higher (p<0.05).
It is observed that physical education teacher and coach candidates differ in the starting sub-dimension of the self-efficacy scale according to their past athletic status (p<0.05). Accordingly, those who have 2 branches have higher scores in the starting dimension than those who have no branches. It was found that teacher and coach candidates differed in the sub-dimension of not giving up, trying to start and continuing-persistence of the self-efficacy scale in terms of departments (p<0.05). However, it was not found to be significant in terms of their total self-efficacy (p>0.05).
As a result, it was found that the self-efficacy of physical education teacher and coach candidates did not differ in terms of gender. In terms of the departments studied, the self-efficacy scale of teacher and coach candidates; It was found that they differed in the sub-dimension of not giving up, starting and continuing effort. From this point of view, it can be said that having an athlete background in a certain sports branch at the stage of admission to the departments they study can contribute positively to their future professional life.

Keywords

Physical Education and Sportts Teacher, Trainer, Self-Efficacy

Beden Eğitimi Öğretmeni ve Antrenör Adaylarının Öz yeterlik Düzeylerinin Farklı Değişkenler Açısından İncelenmesi

Abstract

Öz-yeterlik inancı, bireylerin belirli bir işi o iş için gerekli olan bilgi, deneyim ve becerilere güvenerek yerine getirebileceğine olan inancıdır. Bu çalışmada beden eğitimi ve spor öğretmen adayları ile antrenör adaylarının genel öz yeterliklerinin farklı değişkenler açısından incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Araştırmanın örneklemini 2022-2023 eğitim-öğretim yılında Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Spor Bilimleri Fakültesinde öğrenim gören, yaş ortalaması 21,87±2,36 yıl olan 124'ü kadın, 121'i erkek 245 öğretmen ve antrenör adayından oluşmaktadır. Veri toplama aracı olarak Magaletta ve Oliver (13) tarafından geliştirilen ve Yıldırım ve İlhan (24) tarafından Türkçe geçerlilik ve güvenilirliği yapılan genel öz-yeterlik ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen veriler Independent sample-t testi ve One-way ANOVA testi ile analiz edildi. Cinsiyete göre adayların öz-yeterlik algıları farklılık göstermemektedir (p>0,05). Mesleki geleceğini olumsuz görenlerin, olumlu görenlere göre toplam öz yeterliliklerinin ve başlama alt boyutunun yüksek olmasına rağmen (p<0.05) sürdürme çabası-ısrar alt boyutunda mesleki geleceğini olumlu görenlere göre daha düşük puan aldıkları anlaşılmaktadır (p<0.05). Beden eğitimi öğretmeni ve antrenör adaylarının geçmişindeki sporculuk durumlarına göre, öz yeterlilik ölçeği başlama alt boyutunda farklılaştıkları görülmektedir (p<0.05). Buna göre 2 branşı olanlar, hiç branşı olmayanlara göre başlama boyutunda daha yüksek puana sahiptirler. Öğretmen ve antrenör adaylarının bölümlere göre öz yeterlilik ölçeğinin yılmama, başlama ve sürdürme çabası-ısrar alt boyutunda farklılaştıkları bulunmuştur (p<0.05). Ancak toplam öz yeterlilikleri açısından farklılaşma olmadığı bulunmuştur (p>0.05). Sonuç olarak beden eğitimi öğretmeni ve antrenör adaylarının öz yeterliklerinin cinsiyete göre farklılaşmadığı tespit edilmiştir. Öğretmen ve antrenör adaylarının bölümler açısından öz yeterlilik ölçeğinin yılmama, başlama ve sürdürme çabası-ısrar alt boyutunda farklılaştıkları, beden eğitimi öğretmeni ve antrenör adaylarının geçmişindeki sporculuk durumlarına göre öz yeterlilik ölçeği başlama alt boyutunda farklılaştıkları bulunmuştur (p<0.05). Bu açıdan bakıldığında öğrencilerin öğrenim gördükleri bölümlere kabul aşamasında belirli bir spor dalında sporcu geçmişine sahip olmalarının gelecekteki mesleki yaşamlarına olumlu katkı sağlayabileceği söylenebilir.

Keywords

Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Öğretmeni, Antrenör, Öz yeterlilik

References

• 1. Bandura A, & Locke, EA, Negative self-efficacy and goal effects revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2003; 88(1): 87-99.
• 2. Bandura A, Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychological Review, 1977; 84(2), 191-215.
• 3. Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. 1nd ed. Prentice-Hall, NJ: Englewood Cliffs , 1986: 123-125.
• 4. Bandura A. Self-efficacy. Encyclopedia of Human Behavior. 4 nd ed. Ramachaudran Academic Press, 1994: 234-235.
• 5. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. 2 nd ed. W H Freeman/Times Books/ Henry Holt & Co. WH. Freeman and Company. 1997: 235-237.
• 6. Cho YJ & Shim SS, Predicting teachers’ achievement goals for teaching: The role of perceived school goal structure and teachers’ sense of efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2013; 32, 12–21.
• 7. Evers WJG, Brouwers A & Tomic W, Burnout and self-efficacy: A study on teachers’ beliefs when implementing an innovative educational system in the Netherlands. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 2002; 72(2), 227–243.
• 8. Kahramanoglu R, & Ay Y, Analysis of Primary Teacher Candidates' Perceptions of Special Field Proficiency in Terms of Various Variables. International Journal of Turkish Literature, Culture and Education, 2013; 2(2), 285-301.
• 9. Kangalgil M, Examination of physical education teachers' participation in and possession of special field competencies. Journal of Sport Sciences, Hacettepe J. of Sport Sciences, 2014; 25(2), 94-103.
• 10. Koparan S, Ozturk F, & Korkmaz H, Examination of physical education teachers' self-efficacy and physical education teacher competence. National Physical Education and Sports Instructor. Congress 25-27 May, Van/Yyu Education Faculty Journal Special Issue, 2011;52-61.
• 11. Lee B, Cawthon S, & Dawson K, Elementary and secondary teacher self-efficacy for teaching and pedagogical conceptual change in a drama-based professional development program. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2013; 30(1), 84-98.
• 12. Maddux J E. Self-efficacy , adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application. 2nd ed. I J E M & J Lewis, Plenum Press. 1995:89-90.
• 13. Magaletta PR, OJ, Their Relations with Self-Efficacy, Optimism, and General Well-Being. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1999; 55(5), 539-551.
• 14. Markham G, Balkin D, & Baron R, Inventors and New Venture Formation . Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 2002; 27(2), 149-165.
• 15. Martin JJ, & Kulinna PH, The development of a physical education teachers’ physical activity self-efficacy instrument. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 2003; 22(2), 219-232.
• 16. MEB. Teaching competencies, general and special field competencies of the teaching profession. MEB Publications, 2008
• 17. Moè A, Pazzaglia F & Ronconi L, When being able is not enough. The combined value of positive affect and self-efficacy for job satisfaction in teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2010; 26(5), 1145-1153.
• 18. Paraskeva F, Bouta H & Papagianni A, Individual characteristics and computer self-efficacy in secondary education teachers to integrate technology in educational practice. Computers and Education, 2008; 50(3), 1084-1091.
• 19. Sandıkçı M, & Öncü E, Determination and Comparison of Efficacy Perceptions and Attitudes of Teacher Candidates in Physical Education and Other Fields towards Teaching Profession. Pamukkale Journal of Sport Sciences, 2013; 4(1), 135-151.
• 20. Seçkin A & Başbay M, Examining the self-efficacy beliefs of physical education and sports teacher candidates regarding the teaching profession. International Periodical For The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 2013; 8(8), 253-270.
• 21. Tabachnick BG ve Fidell, LS. Using Multivariate Statistics. 8nd ed. Pearson Education. 2013: 167-168.
• 22. Tsahannen-Moran M & Johnson D, Exploring literacy teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs: Potential sources at play. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2011; 27, 751-761.
• 23. Uysal I, Examination of general self-efficacy beliefs of teacher candidates. Journal of Education and Training Research, 2013; 2(2), 217-226.
• 24. Yıldırım F & İlhan Ö, Validity and Reliability Study of the Turkish Form of the General Self-efficacy Scale. Turkish Journal of Psychiatry, 2010; 21(4), 301-308.
• 25. Zulkosky K, Self-Efficacy : A Concept Analysis. Journal Compilation, Wiley Periodicals, Inc., 2009; 44(2), 93-102.